DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This action is in response to application 18960651 filed 3/18/25.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are presented for examination.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are unclear to the examiner; what does it mean by stating “determining, by the access network device, a first delay from the access network device to the terminal device based on the first round-trip time information, the second round-trip time information and the third round-trip time information”? the claim languages are not very clear of how to determine the “first delay” based on the first, second and third round trip time? Just added them all together? Please clarify
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are unclear to the examiner; what does it mean by stating “sending, by the access network device, the first delay or an offset between the access network device and the terminal device to the terminal device, wherein the first delay or the offset is useable for time synchronization of the terminal device, and the offset is determined based on the first round-trip time information and the first delay”? the claim limitation is not clear about the condition of determine “usable” of the first delay? What exactly the Applicant trying to accomplished? To do what? To sync to the terminal device? What is a reason of having so many round-trip time? It’s either first delay or an offset, what happen if there is not “first delay”, where does the offset from? Please clarify
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 11, 13, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Soriaga, U.S. Pub/Patent No. US 2020/0229124 A1.
As to claim 1, Soriaga teaches a time synchronization method, comprising:
obtaining, by an access network device, first round-trip time information between the access network device and a terminal device, second round-trip time information between the access network device and a benchmark device, and third round-trip time information between the benchmark device and the terminal device (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 12, paragraph 113; page 17, paragraph 156-158; i.e., [0113] Network calibration using RTT procedures begins by first determining the location / position of reference nodes. To determine the location of reference nodes, reference nodes participate in RTT procedures with each other to solve for their relative location. FIG . 7 illustrates an exemplary network 700 in which three base stations 702 ( e.g. , any of the base stations described herein capable of wireless communication with each other , such as any of the gNBs described herein) perform RTT positioning procedures with each other to determine their relative locations, according to aspects of the disclosure. Specifically, base stations 702-1 and 702-3 perform an RTT positioning procedure to derive distance A, base stations 702-1 and 702-2 perform an RTT; [0156] synchronization using the RTT positioning procedures described herein to enable the use of TDOA positioning procedures . A serving base station ( e.g., a gNB) can initiate an RTT procedure with each neighbor base station (e.g., other gNBs) involved in a TDOA procedure with a given UE prior to the TDOA procedure (whether downlink- or uplink - based). As a first option, the application of timing synchronization alignment);
determining, by the access network device, a first delay from the access network device to the terminal device based on the first round-trip time information, the second round-trip time information and the third round-trip time information round-trip time information between the benchmark device and the terminal device (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 13, paragraph 114-115; i.e., [0114] the first base station 802-1 sends an RTT measurement signal 810 ( e.g., PRS, NRS, CRS, CSI - RS, etc.) to the second base station 802-2 at time T? The RTT measurement signal 810 has some propagation delay T Prop as it travels from the first base station 802-1 to the second base station 802-2; [0115] location
of uplink reference signals. Using this measurement and the difference between time T4 and time Ti ( i.e., TTx- > Rx )); and
sending, by the access network device, the first delay or an offset between the access network device and the terminal device to the terminal device, wherein the first delay or the offset is useable for time synchronization of the terminal device, and the offset is determined based on the first round-trip time information and the first delay (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 12, paragraph 111; page 18, paragraph 159-161; i.e., [0111] using RTT - based positioning procedures ( 1 ) to calibrate coordinate positions ( relative and absolute ) for reference nodes and ( 2 ) for synchronization of reference nodes . A “reference node” is any node used in the positioning of a target device ( e.g. , a UE or gNB ) having an unknown position. A “ node ” may be a base station ( macro or small cell ), a cell / TRP supported by a base station; [0159] At 1720 , the positioning entity determines a first distance ( e.g. , distance B in FIG . 7 ) between the first reference node and the second reference node based on the first RTT procedure performed by the first reference node and the second reference node. the first reference node and the second reference node transmits a beamformed reference signal).
As to claim 2, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein receiving, by the access network device, a notification message, wherein the notification message comprises identification information of the benchmark device, identification information of the terminal device, and indication information, and the indication information is useable to indicate to perform a time provision error elimination (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 10, paragraph 90; i.e., [0090] A PRS resource set is identified by a PRS resource set ID and may be associated with a particular TRP (identified by a cell ID) transmitted by an antenna panel of a base station).
As to claim 3, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 2, wherein sending, by the access network device, the identification information of the terminal device and the indication information to the benchmark device (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 10, paragraph 90; i.e., [0090] A PRS resource set is identified by a PRS resource set ID and may be associated with a particular TRP (identified by a cell ID) transmitted by an antenna panel of a base station).
As to claim 4, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein determining, by the access network device, the first delay from the access network device to the terminal device based on a target function, the first round-trip time information, the second round-trip time information and the third round-trip time information (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 13, paragraph 114-115; i.e., [0114] the first base station 802-1 sends an RTT measurement signal 810 ( e.g., PRS, NRS, CRS, CSI - RS, etc.) to the second base station 802-2 at time T? The RTT measurement signal 810 has some propagation delay T Prop as it travels from the first base station 802-1 to the second base station 802-2; [0115] location of uplink reference signals. Using this measurement and the difference between time T4 and time Ti ( i.e., TTx- > Rx )).
As to claim 5, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 4, wherein the target function is preconfigured in the access network device, is from an application function network element or is from a clock management network element (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 13, paragraph 114-115; i.e., [0114] the first base station 802-1 sends an RTT measurement signal 810 ( e.g., PRS, NRS, CRS, CSI - RS, etc.) to the second base station 802-2 at time T? The RTT measurement signal 810 has some propagation delay T Prop as it travels from the first base station 802-1 to the second base station 802-2; [0115] location of uplink reference signals. Using this measurement and the difference between time T4 and time Ti ( i.e., TTx- > Rx )).
As to claim 6, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 4, wherein the determining, by the access network device, the first delay from the access network device to the terminal device based on the target function, the first round-trip time information, the second round-trip time information and the third round-trip time information comprises:
determining, by the access network device, restrictive conditions of the target function based on the first round-trip time information, the second round-trip time information and the third round-trip time information(Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 13, paragraph 114-115; i.e., [0114] the first base station 802-1 sends an RTT measurement signal 810 ( e.g., PRS, NRS, CRS, CSI - RS, etc.) to the second base station 802-2 at time T? The RTT measurement signal 810 has some propagation delay T Prop as it travels from the first base station 802-1 to the second base station 802-2; [0115] location of uplink reference signals. Using this measurement and the difference between time T4 and time Ti ( i.e., TTx- > Rx )); and
determining, by the access network device, the first delay from the access network device to the terminal device based on the target function and the restrictive conditions of the target function(Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 13, paragraph 114-115; i.e., [0114] the first base station 802-1 sends an RTT measurement signal 810 ( e.g., PRS, NRS, CRS, CSI - RS, etc.) to the second base station 802-2 at time T? The RTT measurement signal 810 has some propagation delay T Prop as it travels from the first base station 802-1 to the second base station 802-2; [0115] location of uplink reference signals. Using this measurement and the difference between time T4 and time Ti ( i.e., TTx- > Rx )) .
As to claim 8, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 6, wherein the restrictive conditions of the target function comprise:
(1) a+b=D1;
(2) c+d=D2;
(3) e+f=D3; and
(4) b+c+e=D4,
wherein a is the first delay from the access network device to the terminal device, b is a second delay from the terminal device to the access network device, c is a third delay from the access network device to the benchmark device, d is a fourth delay from the benchmark device to the access network device, e is a fifth delay from the benchmark device to the terminal device, f is a sixth delay from the terminal device to the benchmark device, D1 is determined based on the first round- trip time information, D2 is determined based on the second round-trip time information, D3 is determined based on the third round-trip time information, and D4 is determined based on the first round-trip time information, the second round-trip time information and the third round-trip time information (Soriaga, figure 7 & 17; page 13, paragraph 114-115; i.e., [0114] the first base station 802-1 sends an RTT measurement signal 810 ( e.g., PRS, NRS, CRS, CSI - RS, etc.) to the second base station 802-2 at time T? The RTT measurement signal 810 has some propagation delay T Prop as it travels from the first base station 802-1 to the second base station 802-2; [0115] location of uplink reference signals. Using this measurement and the difference between time T4 and time Ti ( i.e., TTx- > Rx )).
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are directed to a system claims and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 1-6. Therefore, claim(s) 15-20 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 1-6.
Claim(s) 11 & 13 is/are directed to a method claims and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 8. Therefore, claim(s) 11 & 13 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 7, 9-10, 12 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soriaga, U.S. Pub/Patent No. US 2020/0229124 A1 in view of Holtzman, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 2004/0057394 A1.
As to claim 7, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 6. But Soriaga failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the target function is a minimum value function or a minimum mean square error function configured with the restrictive conditions as solution space preferences.
However, Holtzman teaches the limitation wherein the target function is a minimum value function or a minimum mean square error function configured with the restrictive conditions as solution space preferences (Holtzman, figure 7; page 5, paragraph 55-58; i.e., [0055] a minimum mean square error using a condition mean calculation. The minimum mean square error identifies the "best" estimated code word, and thus the best estimated link quality
measurement. By determining the minimum Mean Square Error (MSE)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Soriaga to substitute IWF from Holtzman for AMPS from Soriaga to reduce the complexity such verification (Holtzman, page 1, paragraph 5).
As to claim 9, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 8. But Soriaga failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the target function is min(abs(a-b)+abs(d-c)+abs(f-e)) or min(min(abs(a-b)+abs(d-c)+abs(f-e))), where min() is a minimum value function, and abs is an absolute value function.
However, Holtzman teaches the limitation wherein the target function is min(abs(a-b)+abs(d-c)+abs(f-e)) or min(min(abs(a-b)+abs(d-c)+abs(f-e))), where min() is a minimum value function, and abs is an absolute value function (Holtzman, figure 7; page 5, paragraph 55-58; i.e., [0055] a minimum mean square error using a condition mean calculation. The minimum mean square error identifies the "best" estimated code word, and thus the best estimated link quality measurement. By determining the minimum Mean Square Error (MSE)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Soriaga to substitute IWF from Holtzman for AMPS from Soriaga to reduce the complexity such verification (Holtzman, page 1, paragraph 5).
As to claim 10, Soriaga teaches the method as recited in claim 8. But Soriaga failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the target function is MSE(a-a'), MSE(b-b'), or MSE((a-a')+(b-b')), where MSE is a minimum mean square error function.
However, Holtzman teaches the limitation wherein the target function is MSE(a-a'), MSE(b-b'), or MSE((a-a')+(b-b')), where MSE is a minimum mean square error function (Holtzman, figure 7; page 5, paragraph 55-58; i.e., [0055] a minimum mean square error using a condition mean calculation. The minimum mean square error identifies the "best" estimated code word, and thus the best estimated link quality measurement. By determining the minimum Mean Square Error (MSE)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Soriaga to substitute IWF from Holtzman for AMPS from Soriaga to reduce the complexity such verification (Holtzman, page 1, paragraph 5).
Claim(s) 12 & 14 is/are directed to a method claims and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 9. Therefore, claim(s) 12 & 14 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 9.
Listing of Relevant Arts
Yago, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20170094620 A1 discloses reference device and base station, round-trip delay times, synchronization.
Chu, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20170078990 A1 discloses base station, reference UE, round-trip delay RTD.
Contact Information
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
THUONG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3864. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THUONG NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights